W

wickedsprint

Well Known Member
So to those that fly VFR a lot, how often are you using VORs as backup? I know when I rent I am usually in mostly familiar areas so I am content to use the GPS for direct to courses and not bother with the VOR. Is it worth the extra few grand to have working VOR for someone who will fly strictly VFR? Aren't they phasing it out anyhow? My mission will be fun flying mixed with some longer cross country flights..so I was almost thinking a second GPS with an aviation database might be more useful..ie a 250Xl with a 495..or something along those lines.
 
VFR & VOR....

If you truly will only fly VFR then spend the money on a good GPS instead. I flew my Long-EZ ALL OVER the US with only a Garmin 195! Never turned on a VOR except to see if it even still worked.
 
Forget about the VOR for VFR nav. Get a good GPS. If you want to follow a VOR radial just dial in the VOR identifier and the required track on the GPS.

Steve
7A
 
I agree. You don't need a VOR if you're never going to fly IFR. It's costly, has an ugly antenna and not as useful as a GPS. If you want a back-up, get a second inexpensive hand-held GPS. You may want to plan for a possible VOR/ILS reciever while you are building, in case you change your mind and want to go IFR later. I did this by building a doubler in to the belly of my RV-8 back by the tail with a small hole where I would drill for the antenna. Then I ran a coax cable with a BNC on it to make installation easy. The other end of the cable terminates behind my panel in a coil - with ne end on it for now - to be connected if I so choose in the future.

Scott
 
Amen

I never end up using VOR even for IFR flight..Note the FAA is propsing to dismantle the VOR network as IFR GPS's have their locations installed in them anyway.

I guess they will be virtual VOR's at that point.

Frank
 
So it seems there is no vote for a VOR install, however I agree prudent to consider the room for future expansion should I decide to go that route. I would probably go wingtip ant though as I hate adding drag if I can avoid it, after all these planes are made to boogy.
 
GPS. Only possible exception is somewhere that you need to follow a lot of VOR radials - SoCal basin, for example - and that's easier with a VOR than GPS - or if you want to be able to practice LOC and/or GPS approaches, but you said VFR.

TODR
 
Communication

I don't think it is a compelling reason, but there are still quite a few places where the only communication with Flight Service is through a VOR station.
 
VOR? Don't need it.

I flew my previous plane, a 1951 Aeronca Sedan, for 6 years without a VOR. I had a compass, a handheld GPS, a map, and my eyes. I flew it a lot including from the SF Bay Area to LA a couple of times, out to Arizona, and to Arlington, WA three times with no problems at all.

Guess what? In the RV that I'm building...no VOR. Save your money.

My 2 cents.
 
I have and continue to use VOR. I usually navigate using a handheld GPS remote mounted on the sill. In addition to this, with the press of a button on the panel mounted Garmin 430, the GI-106A CDI responds to either a selected GPS waypoint OR a VOR station the NAV function on the 430 is tuned to. In practice, I commonly GPS navigate with the 496 and have the GI-106A receive a VOR station. Its merely a situational awareness enhancement for my style of flying, that's all. The Archer VOR antenna is hidden in the wingtip and I have found it to be as operationally reliable as any externally mounted VOR antenna I have ever used. Another possible consideration: I am told that a remote CDI is necessary for legal IFR. If that is true, the GI-106A complies with the requirement.

2e5qzb4.jpg
 
I carry at least one handheld GPS in addition to the GNS 430. I don't use VORs. I also have a Sky Chart Atlas for paper situational awareness. If GPS were ever to be unreliable (unlikely) then pilotage would come into play and if need be a call to someone on the ground.
 
After flying my T-Craft with only a compass and my wristwatch for nav aids, I didn't see a need for anything but a GPS (496 in my case). Once you start flying with a GPS you will wonder why you spent the money and are hauling the extra weight around.
 
So basically,

If my mission is Day VFR with an upgrade path to IFR for later, I could use

MGL Odyssey,
two cheap radios (Flight Line FL-760's),
a used Garmin gtx 320 transponder,
a backup compass,
a backup GPS.

I've already installled the Archer
VOR antenna in a wingtip and run the cable, so the option is there.

Would you recommend a VOR install for Night VFR? Although I guess if the VOR's are in the GPS, a VOR receiver is redundant in that mission too. I'm beginning to rethink my panel, because I can move that line between flying and saving money for stuff closer to flying.
 
solar storms?

I've been wondering...does anyone talk about the next solar storm cycle disrupting GPS, either by interference or actual damage to the satellites? I'm no fan of doomsday stories, but sometimes it feels like we're putting all our eggs in the GPS basket...VHF has its advantages.
 
keep the Betamax or just go with blu-ray?
keep the 8 track tape deck or just go with the CD?
keep the CB radio or just go with the cell phone?
keep the slide rule or just go with the computer?



....... keep the VOR or just go with the GPS?


I know.....

just get an iphone:D It does all of the above:D
 
Glide slope !

We are not allowed IFR or night VFR, but I like to be able to get on the ground, if, for some reason, the weather turns bad. With my SL30, Dynon EFIS and the Archer Wingtip antenna, I can fly an ILS approach and save my bud. I may loose my license if doing so, but what is worse: loosing your license or loosing your life? Actually the SL30 has its own built in CDI, which allows you to follow a second VOR, or use the SL30 without an external CDI (no glide slope though).

It also serves as a back-up for the moving map GPS. The cost and weight panelty for my setup, are probably less than the extra cost and weight of a second GPS. I have the Dynon anyway, a radio without the NAV side is not going to be that much lighter and cheaper, the coax and Archer antenna are the things that probably weigh the most. But, I see a lot of people put the coax and some even the antenna, in anyway, for future upgrade.

As always, everybody spends his money the way he wants to spend it and takes the risks he wants to take.

Kind regards, Tonny.
 
Pilottonny said:
The cost and weight panelty for my setup, are probably less than the extra cost and weight of a second GPS.
Click to expand...


This is the biggest dilemma for me on the panel discussion. I do want a nav backup, and if GPS I want it to have airspace. I'm thinking the primary GPS is going to be a 495 or 695..something in the Garmin portable line. If I wanted a panel mounted nav backup, an SL30 is about the same price as a Garmin 250XL..and they both are a nav/comm unit. I think what is going to happen is a garmin portable as mentioned..and a smaller handheld portable with an aviation database in case the main garmin fails. These will obviously be supplements to a good chart. I'm not entirely sold on going with expensive glass panels and their maps yet, while they may be cheaper overall for their functionality, I'm not a big fan of expensive single point failures.
 
Last edited:
Interesting thread....

and I agree that the VOR path is probably redundant if you have GPS in your plane. I installed a VAL INS422 in my 9A for several reasons. I like the thought of having the ILS capability if weather gets me, although I never let it's availability affect my trip planning. The main reason is that by having the capability, I use the skills. I really enjoy the wonderful GPS technology, but I also like to keep my "lower order" navigation skills intact. I will admit, I am one of those guys that sometimes turns all that stuff off and flies with a compass and watch, with a sectional in my lap.
So, bottom line...Do you need it...no, not really.
But I sense the same desire in the thread starter's post as mine. If you want to keep using VOR navigation, by all means, do so.
BTW..look into the often disregarded VAL ILS reciever. Light, completely self contained and reliable. It's initial display wierdness really grows on you, and it is an excellent choice to add some "ace in the hole" redundancy. Nice to have that glide slope and markers in your bag of tricks as well...

My 2 cents,
Chris
 
I installed a Narco NAV 122D in addition to a Garmin GNC250XL in my RV-8. The Narco works great for ILS approaches, and also provides redundancy, however I use the GPS as the primary navigation instrument. At least I have the capability to fly a precision approach, just in case. I doubt if I would do it that way again, especially since I do not fly IFR in the RV-8. Today there are some better alternatives (glass) that cost about the same or less.
 
Narco 112D is a great idea - 1-piece VOR/LOC/GS RX and CDI, will also act as a CDI for other NAV sources. Only downside is the expense.

VAL INS422 is also a good idea, no idea how well it works.

TODR
 
I put a VOR in my VFR plane. I plan to travel a lot to unfamiliar places, and I lost signal on my Garmin 196 enough not to be able trust it to go single source. When I sold my Mooney I delvered it to Al. from Ct. I was in the florida panhandle are, surrounded by restricted airspace I got the "signal lost" message from my Garmin. I need to KNOW where I am NOW, not happy with anything less. I have my antenna in the wingtip, and I also have the glideslope should I ever need it
 
What About Loran or ADF

I think that I might consider an old loran, or even a ADF before I would install a VOR. Having a ground based nav system as backup for GPS aint all bad though, even for VFR flights. But, like was said, a map works too, but if you are unsure of your current position, a mape may not help all that much.
 
If you ever plan to fly IFR you will need a VOR. That is why I put an
SL-30 in my -8A. In my six I had a NAV 11. Larry on page one of this thread
mentioned communicating with Flight Service using the VOR which is another reasons I have one. If you plan on installing an EFIS (like I did), using it as the OBS head saves a lot of money not having to buy a indicator and it's WAY easier to wire. If only VFR is in your future I'd skip it. Most of us carry a handheld as a back up, and some even have VOR's.
 
Last edited:
That's the ticket!

sjhurlbut said:
Forget about the VOR for VFR nav. Get a good GPS. If you want to follow a VOR radial just dial in the VOR identifier and the required track on the GPS.

Steve
7A
Click to expand...

I sometimes wondered if I would miss the VOR I had in my C172. The GPS will lock onto one if you ever need it.
 
A map is a must, anyway!

We would get a serious fine, if we would get cought flying without a current map, by the "aero-officials", no matter what avionics you have!
Do people realy fly without any map at all, solely relying on the maps of the GPS ?? :eek:
 
Pilottonny said:
We would get a serious fine, if we would get cought flying without a current map, by the "aero-officials", no matter what avionics you have!
Do people realy fly without any map at all, solely relying on the maps of the GPS ?? :eek:
Click to expand...

Haha...this is source of great argument in parsing the holy FARs here in the US. Many people will swear up and down that you must have a current sectional (chart) onboard the aircraft, but that is simply not the case. I have never read a FAR that requires it.

The FARs simply state that you are supposed to have all of the pertinent info needed for the flight. If you're flying around the patch a few times and have done it a hundred times before, checked notams beforehand, know that the CTAF hasn't changed, then no, a sectional is not necessary.
 
Jamie said:
Haha...this is source of great argument in parsing the holy FARs here in the US. Many people will swear up and down that you must have a current sectional (chart) onboard the aircraft, but that is simply not the case. I have never read a FAR that requires it.

The FARs simply state that you are supposed to have all of the pertinent info needed for the flight. If you're flying around the patch a few times and have done it a hundred times before, checked notams beforehand, know that the CTAF hasn't changed, then no, a sectional is not necessary.
Click to expand...


It's my understanding and those more in the know correct me, but my flight instructor and IP both maintain that if you fly into class B you need that class B supplement chart...
 
No chart required, but...

wickedsprint said:
It's my understanding and those more in the know correct me, but my flight instructor and IP both maintain that if you fly into class B you need that class B supplement chart...
Click to expand...

Sorry, but this is a "hot button" of mine. First, your instructor is wrong but at least wrong in the direction of safety. There is no requirement, have a look yourself: FAR 91.131 and AIM 9-1-4 (2). I get a little cranky when I read posts with "somebody told me" or "I heard it in the pilot lounge." PLEASE look it up yourself and make the decision. Remember, you are the pilot in command, not the guy in the lounge. <rant off>

The FARs are interesting in that frequently they do something like this example, not requiring the chart to be on board, but hold you to some very close navigation where you will need the chart. If you do screw up you might get busted for failing to properly plan your flight. Keep it simple, have an up to date chart on board.


John Clark ATP, CFI
FAAST Team Member
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
John Clark said:
Sorry, but this is a "hot button" of mine. First, your instructor is wrong but at least wrong in the direction of safety. There is no requirement, have a look yourself: FAR 91.131 and AIM 9-1-4 (2). I get a little cranky when I read posts with "somebody told me" or "I heard it in the pilot lounge." PLEASE look it up yourself and make the decision. Remember, you are the pilot in command, not the guy in the lounge. <rant off>

The FARs are interesting in that frequently they do something like this example, not requiring the chart to be on board, but hold you to some very close navigation where you will need the chart. If you do screw up you might get busted for failing to properly plan your flight. Keep it simple, have an up to date chart on board.


John Clark ATP, CFI
FAAST Team Member
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
Click to expand...

Thanks for the correction, I wasn't too concerned about the actual answer since I considered it a prudent practice anyhow.
 
New rules...

Chino Tom said:
If you ever plan to fly IFR you will need a VOR.
Click to expand...
Until they changes the rules and removed the requirements for ground facilities. See below:
Paragraph (d) of 91.205 speaks directly to IFR operations:
(d) Instrument flight rules. For IFR flight, the following instruments and equipment are required:
(1) Instruments and equipment specified in paragraph (b) of this section, and, for night flight, instruments and equipment specified in paragraph (c) of this section.
(2) Two-way radio communication and navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown.
(3) Gyroscopic rate-of-turn indicator, except on the following aircraft:

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFar.nsf/FARSBySectLookup/91.205

So the question is, do or do you not have to have a VOR anymore...
 
MauiLvrs said:
Until they changes the rules and removed the requirements for ground facilities. See below:
Paragraph (d) of 91.205 speaks directly to IFR operations:
(d) Instrument flight rules. For IFR flight, the following instruments and equipment are required:
(1) Instruments and equipment specified in paragraph (b) of this section, and, for night flight, instruments and equipment specified in paragraph (c) of this section.
(2) Two-way radio communication and navigation equipment suitable for the route to be flown.
(3) Gyroscopic rate-of-turn indicator, except on the following aircraft:

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFar.nsf/FARSBySectLookup/91.205

So the question is, do or do you not have to have a VOR anymore...
Click to expand...

No, for the same reason that DME isn't required, nor is an ADF, nor LORAN, etc. You need the equipment *suitable for the route to be flown*. If your intention is to make an NDB approach, well, you'll need an ADF. If not, you don't need it. If your route and your approach can all be done without VORs, as in GPS for the DP, GPS for the en route portion, GPS for the STAR and GPS for the IAP, then all you need is...GPS. If somewhere along the route you need a VOR *for the route you intend to fly*, then you'll have to have a VOR on-board.

All that's required is the equipment that you need for your planned route(s) (including alternates, etc.).

Oh, and regarding charts and the requirements for having them on-board...I've got an even better one for ya...I had an FBO owner here insist to me (in front of a prospective new pilot) that the *A/FD* was required on-board! He swore that if you didn't have it and you got ramp-checked, you could get violated. Of course, when asked to point out the regulation that required this, he suddenly didn't "have time for that s**t". I suspect he was trying to sell A/FDs to make a little extra cash off of unsuspecting new students! :)
 
I would install one. I use it regularly, though I could fly VFR in the socal basin without a map i'm so familiar with it. The airplane I fly regularly (Cessna Cardinal...) has a IFR GPS, SL30, MX20, and I consider the VOR to be the most important part of that setup.

GPS tells you where you are, but I've seen it "burp" and lose IFR (RAIM) capability enough to know that it can just drop to NOTHING in some areas, particularly around military airspace. VFR thats nice except now you are probably skirting near restricted airspace with no navigation.

I know many people I fly with don't regularly fly with VOR's, but how are you going to maintain proficiency with it if you don't have one in your airplane?


Or maybe I'm just oldskool.... :rolleyes:

Edit: Per above, it looks like the regs changed this year to remove "ground facilities used" terminology. Still I would NEVER even CONSIDER launching IFR without a VOR.
 
Last edited:
What I think I'd do (and what I probably will do when I get to this point) is just install the VOR antenna and feed it into the GPS unit (assuming something like a 430/530), and then use that if ever needed or just to maintain proficiency. But truthfully, with the plan to decommission most VORs, anyway, there's not much to argue for a separate VOR receiver/OBS.

VORs, at least to me, are going the way of 4-course ranges, NDBs and lighted airways.
 
Flying Scotsman said:
...If your intention is to make an NDB approach, well, you'll need an ADF.
Click to expand...
But, if the fix is in your IFR GPS, you can use the GPS instead... correct?
One reason for our switch to the 300XL from the SL30 is that the FAA is starting to turn off VOR stations this year. There has been no indication that the ILSs will be turned off. But, for us, we decided that if we can't get into KTCY with a 400' DH and 1 mile viz, its beyond what we set as our presonal limits. We decided that hard IFR in a single recip is beyond the risk level that we are willing to spend.

Addionally, we set the limit that there should be a VFR airport as an alternate within the range of our flight.
 
MauiLvrs said:
But, if the fix is in your IFR GPS, you can use the GPS instead... correct?
Click to expand...

Yes, but I was trying to avoid getting into details like overlay approaches, etc., and think bigger picture.

One reason for our switch to the 300XL from the SL30 is that the FAA is starting to turn off VOR stations this year. There has been no indication that the ILSs will be turned off. But, for us, we decided that if we can't get into KTCY with a 400' DH and 1 mile viz, its beyond what we set as our presonal limits. We decided that hard IFR in a single recip is beyond the risk level that we are willing to spend.

Addionally, we set the limit that there should be a VFR airport as an alternate within the range of our flight.
Click to expand...

And now with LNAV/VNAV/LPV...aren't some of these approaches now down to 200 and 1/2?
 
Flying Scotsman said:
Yes, but I was trying to avoid getting into details like overlay approaches, etc., and think bigger picture.
And now with LNAV/VNAV/LPV...aren't some of these approaches now down to 200 and 1/2?
Click to expand...

I hate to break it to you, but VOR's aren't going away. They are still maintaining the NDB at El Monte CA, where I work... The myth propagated by the FAA that VOR's are going away and NextGen will actually do anything are still a distant future.
 
osxuser said:
I hate to break it to you, but VOR's aren't going away. They are still maintaining the NDB at El Monte CA, where I work... The myth propagated by the FAA that VOR's are going away and NextGen will actually do anything are still a distant future.
Click to expand...

Hey, Steve...sent you a PM...EMT is my home field :) and I've flown that NDB-C many times...

I'm sure VORs will stick around for a good long while, and I'll certainly have a VOR antenna hooked up to the GPS so I can use them if necessary, but it sure seems to me that the pace of GPS approach certifications has picked up the last couple of years, since WAAS became operational.

I think as more and more pilots get comfortable with GPS approach capabilities, there will be increasing pressure on the FAA to certify more of them, and they'll eventually just become the de facto norm, with VOR/ILS more of a quaint holdover from a bygone era (much like NDBs are now :) ).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.